The Long Road Towards the “Smart City”
The fifth edition of the Smart City Expo World Congress starts today in Barcelona. It is expected to bring together over 11,000 visitors from over 500 cities worldwide to discuss new technologies and listen to experts in all aspects of the “Smart City”. But, what is a “Smart City”?
In recent years, the idea of “Smart Cities” has become something of a media phenomenon and a topic of discussion at urban development conferences everywhere. But what do we actually mean by “Smart City”?
Firstly, don’t panic, it’s the same old song and dance (but this time mic’d up and broadcast wirelessly through Google hangouts). In reality, there is nothing new here. If you have spent years working in e-Government, you’re already on the right path. As we already know, e-Government is simply the application of ICT in order to improve administrative efficiency and relationships with local citizens. E-Government encompasses all activities that fall under public administration and is not only linked to one concrete technology, but instead incorporates all of them. As such, the “Smart City” is one dimension above e-Government.
One of the key characteristics of a “Smart City” is the availability of a database of georeferenced information about a city. This database began to develop in Barcelona in the 1970s, as in many other cities. Other characteristics, such as the presence of communication networks or the deployment of sensors, were later incorporated. The natural evolution of technology brings with it progressive applications of these tools, in areas previously considered too tricky, costly, or impractical.
“Smart City” is a term that’s been in vogue since the late 1980s, but its use has broadened over the past 10 years. The concept was spawned during a period of crisis in the ICT sector, immediately after the collapse of the dotcom bubble. However, even today there is still no common consensus with regards to a definition or noteworthy examples of what this means. Will this remain a mere fad, and with all fads, a sales strategy?
Who is interested in “Smart City” business? Smart City companies as sellers, and the politicians looking for eye-catching quick-fixes as buyers. Not to mention, citizens, right? Of course they are, if all this appears to improve the effective functioning of the city on a daily basis, in comfort and within budget.
In 2013, more than 150 comparative evaluations were conducted on cities, based on macroeconomic indicators or subjective surveys. From these, “Smart City” rankings were taken. The majority resulted in rankings based on aggregate indices, from multiple weighted indicators. Very few have a rigorous approach.
In the end, this data serves as a tool that facilitates the commercialization of cities, rather than being useful in improving electronic administration. Moreover, it sets off a frenzy between politicians, all racing to try and make their cities more “Smart” than the next, instead of addressing the genuine needs of their city and its inhabitants. Just another breeding ground for the sale of magic solutions.
Over time, trends fade away. In the same way that arguments lose strength, new ones are brought to the table. In this manner, the concept continues to expand into new areas. I recall how, one day at an international conference, someone said, “There is no (Smart) City ‘without’ (Smart) Citizens.” This phrase, that served to introduce public policies in favor of social innovation, stuck. And now it so happens that Open Data, Open Government and citizen innovation also fall under the “Smart City” category. Equally included in this grouping are electric vehicles and smart traffic management, not to mention citizen participation, especially when involving the use of apps and furthermore, digital platforms to promote public dialogue and citizen involvement (despite the fact that all this, as you are well aware, was around already).
These days, “Smart City” encompasses everything and anything, as reflected by certain conceptual models such as Cohen’s Wheel: “smart health”, “smart education”, “smart economy”… and even “smart people”!
The essence is in knowing what it is that your city and its citizens need, and from here, beginning to search for and piece together the various pieces of the puzzle that will shape its information system. The key is that this should be built from the bottom up. It’s no use installing a good control center if interoperability issues between the databases of the city and its infrastructure remain unresolved.
To build an effective solution, it’s important to stand out on the global stage, to understand what others have achieved and how they have resolved similar issues in comparable and distinct situations. In short, to compare ourselves to others, to learn from them and to find sources of inspiration. Here is where a proper benchmarking system would help to identify practices that could serve as a source of inspiration to improve our own systems.
At the end of the day, what is truly important is how this reaches citizens and how this impacts the operational quality of municipal organisation and urban society: services, costs, improvements and value. Fortunately, it is not only those managing municipalities that have learnt to use technology, but also citizens who understand the potential of new technologies. This has a crucial knock on effect. Those district councils that historically only participated on a small-scale through municipal plenary sessions and occasional public forums, are now requesting more frequent meetings. Now, the mechanisms that facilitate citizen participation are so abundant that a good government cannot ignore them.
The solution is simple. Work with your citizens hand in hand and push forward with modernization, as much for municipal organisation as for the services that guarantee that the city runs smoothly, all of which allows an urban society to achieve its full potential. If you can’t install any sensors, don’t worry. This won’t make your city any less “Smart.”
(Translated from the Spanish original by Hannah Leach)
